On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:00 PM Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 22/02/2023 20:43, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 7:07 PM Daniel Lezcano > > <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Some drivers are directly using the thermal zone's 'device' structure > >> field. > >> > >> Use the driver device pointer instead of the thermal zone device when > >> it is available. > >> > >> Remove the traces when they are duplicate with the traces in the core > >> code. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Reviewed-by: Balsam CHIHI <bchihi@xxxxxxxxxxxx> #Mediatek LVTS > >> --- > > [ ... ] > > >> thermal_zone_device_update(data->ti_thermal, THERMAL_EVENT_UNSPECIFIED); > >> > >> - dev_dbg(&data->ti_thermal->device, "updated thermal zone %s\n", > >> + dev_dbg(data->bgp->dev, "updated thermal zone %s\n", > >> data->ti_thermal->type); > > > > The code before the change is more consistent, because it refers to > > the same object in both instances. > > > > It looks like a type field accessor is needed, eg. thermal_zone_device_type()? > > > > Or move the debug message to thermal_zone_device_update()? > > Actually it is done on purpose because the patch 9 replaces the accesses > to 'type' by 'id', the thermal_zone_device_type() accessor won't be needed. Cool. However, this is a change in behavior (albeit small) which doesn't appear to be necessary. What would be wrong with having a tz->type accessor too?
